How Inflation Confiscates Wealth

Adam Smith's invisible hand will reach out and touch...well, everyone.

You'd think so, but as long as corporate interests can effect legislation with campaign contributions, that's a pipe dream. The hand may still be unseen, but it's hardly unbiased.

Hold on a minute, is this a liberal suggesting that regulation may actually be BENEFITING corporations???
 
You know what else eats up wealth.

causing a boom and bust in the housing market.

it eats up the main wealth of the middle class and serves it up on a silver platter to those who have big money.

The republican partys failed ideas have done this twice in one life time already.

The American people cant afford your failed ideas anymore

The Federal Reserve, Freddie, Fannie, the CRA...the ideas that cause boom and bust cycles...these are all solely attributable the Republican party? I did not know that.

All of those things had very little to do with the "boom". You'd have more of a case if you pointed to Glass-Steagall being revoked and Bush dropping interest rates to zero.
 
Adam Smith's invisible hand will reach out and touch...well, everyone.

You'd think so, but as long as corporate interests can effect legislation with campaign contributions, that's a pipe dream. The hand may still be unseen, but it's hardly unbiased.

Hold on a minute, is this a liberal suggesting that regulation may actually be BENEFITING corporations???

Of course they do. Regulations are extremely helpful to most corporations in this country.
 
Markets never produce inflation. Inflation is a monetary phenomenon and consists of a growth of the money supply exceeding the growth in goods and services on the market.

I don't know if I fully agree with that.

What about when the economy is growing so fast that manufacturers can't keep up with the demand for their product? When this happens, prices tend to rise (less supply, higher price), which can cause inflation as well.

Economies/Markets growing too quickly can cause inflation too, regardless of the supply of money in the economy.
 
Inflation doesn't confiscate wealth...

No but false inflation does. When markets would have otherwise produced no inflation, or even deflation, forcing it via central price controls (aka a central bank) is most certainly a confiscation of wealth from those that are not borrowers but are simply trying to pay the bills and survive. Inflation is the most regressive tax of them all.

What inflationary moves has the fed made recently?

Both rounds of quantitative easing. Asset purchases not sterilized by separate asset sales, which increases the supply of money.
 
You'd think so, but as long as corporate interests can effect legislation with campaign contributions, that's a pipe dream. The hand may still be unseen, but it's hardly unbiased.

Hold on a minute, is this a liberal suggesting that regulation may actually be BENEFITING corporations???

Of course they do. Regulations are extremely helpful to most corporations in this country.

So then you're a liberal who would like to see a huge regulatory overhaul?
 
List of recessions in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Take some time studying this list.

look at how long they lasted and how often they occured.

You will see a pattern of constant boom and bust.

In that enviroment no middle class can build any real gains.


THAT IS WHY GLASS STEAGAL WAS IMPLIMENTED!


now look at the time of Glass Steagal?


You will see how and why this country built a middle class.

Then what happened a few short years after the republican party finnaly was able to kill GS?


without the proper regulations on the lending industry you have a constant cycle of Boom and bust in which NO middle class can build.


I dont want that country and every middle class person doesnt either

this one chart shows the truth of the right failed ideas fo deregulation.


Deregulation is nothing but a gift to the wealthy and a harpoon pointed at the middle class.
 
Inflation doesn't confiscate wealth...

No but false inflation does. When markets would have otherwise produced no inflation, or even deflation, forcing it via central price controls (aka a central bank) is most certainly a confiscation of wealth from those that are not borrowers but are simply trying to pay the bills and survive. Inflation is the most regressive tax of them all.

What inflationary moves has the fed made recently?

Just about every one they could possibly make. Keeping interest rates below where they would be in a free market is where they start. Monetizing their own debt would be at the top of the list.
 
No but false inflation does. When markets would have otherwise produced no inflation, or even deflation, forcing it via central price controls (aka a central bank) is most certainly a confiscation of wealth from those that are not borrowers but are simply trying to pay the bills and survive. Inflation is the most regressive tax of them all.

What inflationary moves has the fed made recently?

Both rounds of quantitative easing. Asset purchases not sterilized by separate asset sales, which increases the supply of money.

You'd be right if that caused actual inflation. It didn't. Energy prices have been mostly responsible for the creeping inflation we are seeing.
 
Regulations are extremely helpful to most corporations in this country.

To the biggest corporations, the ones that can afford to comply with all the regulations, the ones that benefit greatly by regulations keeping their competitors at bay, yes, they're extremely helpful. To smaller companies trying to compete, to consumers that have to pay for all those regulations in the form of higher prices, not so much.
 
You know what else eats up wealth.

causing a boom and bust in the housing market.

it eats up the main wealth of the middle class and serves it up on a silver platter to those who have big money.

The republican partys failed ideas have done this twice in one life time already.

The American people cant afford your failed ideas anymore

The Federal Reserve, Freddie, Fannie, the CRA...the ideas that cause boom and bust cycles...these are all solely attributable the Republican party? I did not know that.

All of those things had very little to do with the "boom". You'd have more of a case if you pointed to Glass-Steagall being revoked and Bush dropping interest rates to zero.

The business cycle has been happening predictably for the last 100 years. Regulatory measures goes right back into Bastiat's seen and unseen. There are always unseen consequences when govt.s, central banks, regulatory measures/subsidies interfere with the market. The repeal of portions of Glass-Steagull did not cause the boom, or the bust in 2008. Artifically low interest rates and govt. programs to make housing affordable to "anyone", did.
 
What inflationary moves has the fed made recently?

Both rounds of quantitative easing. Asset purchases not sterilized by separate asset sales, which increases the supply of money.

You'd be right if that caused actual inflation. It didn't. Energy prices have been mostly responsible for the creeping inflation we are seeing.
Sallow, any asset purchase program the Fed utilizes that isn't accompanied by parallel asset sales from their portfolio, isn't a repo, or maturity of an asset already in their portfolio, is considered inflationary as it increases M1 and therefore the amount of lendable money.

Whether or not price inflation has ensued yet is irrelevant. The possibility for it to happen is now there.
 
Last edited:
Hold on a minute, is this a liberal suggesting that regulation may actually be BENEFITING corporations???

Of course they do. Regulations are extremely helpful to most corporations in this country.

So then you're a liberal who would like to see a huge regulatory overhaul?

Depends on what sector you are talking about. I'd like to see Glass-Steagall restored. And I think stuff like Dark Pools could use a bit more oversite.
 
Regulations are extremely helpful to most corporations in this country.

To the biggest corporations, the ones that can afford to comply with all the regulations, the ones that benefit greatly by regulations keeping their competitors at bay, yes, they're extremely helpful. To smaller companies trying to compete, to consumers that have to pay for all those regulations in the form of higher prices, not so much.

Exactly. The pay to play corp. and govt. relationship that totally destroys competition in a given industry/sector. We see this perversion of the markets in almost every single sector of our economy. It's called corporatism, or perhaps just as accurate, fascism.
 
Both rounds of quantitative easing. Asset purchases not sterilized by separate asset sales, which increases the supply of money.

You'd be right if that caused actual inflation. It didn't. Energy prices have been mostly responsible for the creeping inflation we are seeing.
Sallow, any asset purchase program the Fed utilizes that isn't accompanied by parallel asset sales from their portfolio, isn't a repo, or maturity of an asset already in their portfolio, is considered inflationary as it increases M1 and therefore the amount of lendable money.

Whether or not price inflation has ensued yet is irrelevant. The possibility for it to happen is now there.

You'd be right if there was inflation to begin with..there wasn't. The opposite was happening. And QE was used to keep the market from tanking.
 
The Federal Reserve, Freddie, Fannie, the CRA...the ideas that cause boom and bust cycles...these are all solely attributable the Republican party? I did not know that.

All of those things had very little to do with the "boom". You'd have more of a case if you pointed to Glass-Steagall being revoked and Bush dropping interest rates to zero.

The business cycle has been happening predictably for the last 100 years. Regulatory measures goes right back into Bastiat's seen and unseen. There are always unseen consequences when govt.s, central banks, regulatory measures/subsidies interfere with the market. The repeal of portions of Glass-Steagull did not cause the boom, or the bust in 2008. Artifically low interest rates and govt. programs to make housing affordable to "anyone", did.

Except that's not what happened..well not completely. You are right about the interest rates. You aren't about the "government programs". Financial firms started backing loans and this led to predatory lenders which often lied about a borrowers ability to pay back those loans.
 
Deregulation always fails.

Reajusting regulations to fit changing conditions is what an Adult government does regularly.

This country has NOT been able opperate like adults since the republican party desided ALL regulations just need to be killed.
 
You'd be right if that caused actual inflation. It didn't. Energy prices have been mostly responsible for the creeping inflation we are seeing.
Sallow, any asset purchase program the Fed utilizes that isn't accompanied by parallel asset sales from their portfolio, isn't a repo, or maturity of an asset already in their portfolio, is considered inflationary as it increases M1 and therefore the amount of lendable money.

Whether or not price inflation has ensued yet is irrelevant. The possibility for it to happen is now there.

You'd be right if there was inflation to begin with..there wasn't. The opposite was happening. And QE was used to keep the market from tanking.

You're missing the point. You asked what inflationary move the Fed has made. QE is by definition INFLATIONARY, because it's an increase in the monetary base.

You can't say inflation wasn't happening, because commodities were BOOMING leading into the collapse. Oil, wheat, food prices, gasoline, they were all skyrocketing. They dropped for a time via deflationary forces after the collapse, but have quickly shot right back up to where they were, with oil now near $110 and the rest of the commodity market booming as well.

That was the whole intention of the Fed with their purchase programs, to reflate the economy. So it's interesting to say the least that you wouldn't consider their moves inflationary, regardless of the fact that it's an inflationary move by definition anyway.
 
Exactly. The pay to play corp. and govt. relationship that totally destroys competition in a given industry/sector. We see this perversion of the markets in almost every single sector of our economy. It's called corporatism, or perhaps just as accurate, fascism.

I heard someone say that "the greatest threat to capitalism are the capitalists, themselves", and I think this holds a lot of truth.

Why deal with a free market when you can pay the government to manipulate it and tip the scales in your favor?

This is one of the reasons why I think we don’t really have a “small government” party, or why the small gov’t party really doesn’t do anything to shrink the size and power of government when they are in office (take Bush W., for example, and his 8 years of government expansion).

As long as we have this system where candidates have to raise millions each election cycle, and the corporations and powerful business interests are the ones providing a bulk of the dough, we’ll never see a reduction in the regulatory power of government.

NEVER.

I hope most people who vote Republican wishing for small government realize this.

The businesses that truly want and will benefit from less regulation are the small and the medium sized business, but unfortunately they have a very tiny say in the matter.
 
Last edited:

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top